How Satisfied Are Patients and Surgeons with Telemedicine in Orthopaedic Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Clin Orthop Relat Res

H. Chaudhry, S. Nadeem, R. Mundi, Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Published: January 2021

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has resulted in a rapid pivot toward telemedicine owing to closure of in-person elective clinics and sustained efforts at physical distancing worldwide. Throughout this period, there has been revived enthusiasm for delivering and receiving orthopaedic care remotely. Unfortunately, rapidly published editorials and commentaries during the pandemic have not adequately conveyed findings of published randomized trials on this topic.

Questions/purposes: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials, we asked: (1) What are the levels of patient and surgeon satisfaction with the use of telemedicine as a tool for orthopaedic care delivery? (2) Are there differences in patient-reported outcomes between telemedicine visits and in-person visits? (3) What is the difference in time commitment between telemedicine and in-person visits?

Methods: In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we conducted a systematic review with the primary objective to determine patient and surgeon satisfaction with telemedicine, and secondary objectives to determine differences in patient-reported outcomes and time commitment. We used combinations of search keywords and medical subject headings around the terms "telemedicine", "telehealth", and "virtual care" combined with "orthopaedic", "orthopaedic surgery" and "randomized." We searched three medical databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library) in duplicate and performed manual searches to identify randomized controlled trials evaluating the outcomes of telemedicine and in-person orthopaedic assessments. Trials that studied an intervention that was considered to be telemedicine (that is, any form of remote or virtual care including, but not limited to, video, telephone, or internet-based care), had a control group that comprised in-person assessments performed by orthopaedic surgeons, and were reports of Level I original evidence were included in this study. Studies evaluating physiotherapy or rehabilitation interventions were excluded. Data was extracted by two reviewers and quantitative and qualitive summaries of results were generated. Methodological quality of included trials was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, which uniformly rated the trials at high risk of bias within the blinding categories (blinding of providers, patients, and outcome assessors). We screened 133 published articles; 12 articles (representing eight randomized controlled trials) met the inclusion criteria. There were 1008 patients randomized (511 to telemedicine groups and 497 to control groups). Subspecialties represented were hip and knee arthroplasty (two trials), upper extremity (two trials), pediatric trauma (one trial), adult trauma (one trial), and general orthopaedics (two trials).

Results: There was no difference in the odds of satisfaction between patients receiving telemedicine care and those receiving in-person care (pooled odds ratio 0.89 [95% CI 0.40 to 1.99]; p = 0.79). There were also no differences in surgeon satisfaction (pooled OR 0.38 [95% CI 0.07 to 2.19]; p = 0.28) or among multiple patient-reported outcome measures that evaluated pain and function. Patients reported time savings, both when travel time was excluded (17 minutes shorter [95% CI 2 to 32]; p = 0.03) and when it was included (180 minutes shorter [95% CI 78 to 281]; p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Evidence from heterogeneous randomized studies demonstrates that the use of telemedicine for orthopaedic assessments does not result in identifiable differences in patient or surgeon satisfaction compared with in-person assessments. Importantly, the source studies in this review did not adequately capture or report safety endpoints, such as complications or missed diagnoses. Future studies must be adequately powered to detect these differences to ensure patient safety is not compromised with the use of telemedicine. Although telemedicine may lead to a similar patient experience, surgeons should maintain a low threshold for follow-up with in-person assessments whenever possible in the absence of further safety data.

Level Of Evidence: Level I, therapeutic study.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7899486PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CORR.0000000000001494DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

surgeon satisfaction
16
telemedicine
13
orthopaedic care
12
systematic review
12
patient surgeon
12
in-person assessments
12
trials
9
telemedicine orthopaedic
8
review meta-analysis
8
in-person
8

Similar Publications

Aim: The aim of this study was to investigate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following lumbar discectomy on patients with lateral lumbar disc herniation (LDH) compared to patients with paramedian LDH.

Background: Surgery for disc herniation is one of the most common procedures of the lumbar spine. LDHs can be divided into median, paramedian, foraminal and extraforaminal types based on the anatomical site of the lesion.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: In the case of end-stage hallux rigidus, first metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint arthrodesis is the gold-standard and is traditionally performed via an open approach. However, complications such as nonunion have been reported to be as high as 30%. Recently, there have been reports demonstrating a percutaneous approach to be effective and safe.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Objective: To determine if surgical skills instructors' experience and qualifications influence students' learning of small animal ovariohysterectomy on a model (mOVH).

Sample Population: Second-year veterinary students (n = 105).

Methods: Students were randomized to three groups, taught by: (1) residency-trained surgeons with over 3 years' experience teaching mOVH, (2) general practitioners with over 3 years' experience teaching mOVH (GP >3), and (3) general practitioners with under 3 years' experience (GP <3).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR) is a common procedure, yet long-term patient-centered outcome studies remain limited. This study aims to evaluate the outcomes of arthroscopic RCR using a single-row metallic anchor technique over a 12-year follow-up, focusing on patient-reported outcomes and potential risk factors. A monocentric cohort study was conducted on patients who underwent complete arthroscopic RCR with a single-row metallic anchor technique from January 2007 to July 2011.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

: Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) for the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) has been standardized over the last 20 years. At our institution, only n = 3 rob arms are used for RARP. In addition, n = 2, 12 mm lap trocars are placed for the bedside assistant symmetrically at the midclavicular lines, which allows for direct pelvic triangulation and greater involvement of the assisting surgeon.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!